LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
February 14/09

Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to Saint Mark 6,30-34. The apostles gathered together with Jesus and reported all they had done and taught. He said to them, "Come away by yourselves to a deserted place and rest a while." People were coming and going in great numbers, and they had no opportunity even to eat. So they went off in the boat by themselves to a deserted place. People saw them leaving and many came to know about it. They hastened there on foot from all the towns and arrived at the place before them. When he disembarked and saw the vast crowd, his heart was moved with pity for them, for they were like sheep without a shepherd; and he began to teach them many things.

Free Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
Rafic Hariri and the 2009 Elections-By: Walid Choucair/Dar Al-Hayat 13/02/09
Week before Gaza op, Israel and Syria were ready for direct talks.By:  By Zvi Barel.Ha'aretz 13/02/09
White House warms to thaw in ties with Syria-Financial Times 13/02/09
Gun permits frozen ahead of rally marking Hariri murder-By Nicholas Kimbrell 13/02/09
Israel, Hezbollah: Has deterrence worked?By:Nicholas Blanford/Christian Science Monitor 13/02/09
Abdullah: The Relentless King-Middle East Times 13/02/09

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for February 13/09
U.S. Intelligence Chief Says Hizbullah Remains Threat-Naharnet
France Hopes to See Hariri Killers in Court-Naharnet
Hariri For Disciplined Rally on Saturday-Naharnet
Lebanon Provides Fertile Ground for Iranian Influence-Voice of America
Gunmen Snatch MEA Official at Beirut Airport-Naharnet
National Bloc: Aoun’s campaign against supporters of sovereignty is odd to the Christian principles-Future News
Aoun's Son in-law Jobran Bassil is not against Lebanese- Israeli negotiations-Future News
U.N. Investigators in Syria on Eve of Hariri's Murder Anniversary-Naharnet
Kerry Includes Lebanon in Mideast Tour-Naharnet
Wiretapping Crisis Escalates As Police Chief Accuses Bassil of Withholding Data-Naharnet
Feltman Says U.S. Support for Tribunal Is 'Non-Negotiable' and 'Irreversible'-Naharnet
12,000 Employees Manning Polling Centers Will Be Able to Vote-Naharnet
U.S. Provides $12 Million to Lebanese Police-Naharnet
Jumblat to Send 'Positive' Message to Hizbullah at Feb. 14 Rally-Naharnet
State Budget Again Postponed Till Next Thursday-Naharnet
Clinton Stresses Full Support for Lebanon, Pledges $6 Million for Tribunal-Naharnet
Nayla Tueni: Martyrs' Blood Liberated Lebanon-Naharnet
Hariri Would Not Forget May 7, But would Eventually Forgive-Naharnet
Hezbollah not to revenge its commander's assassination-Xinhua
Israel is his top priority-Ha'aretz
Israel warns of new Hezbollah attack-Religious Intelligence Ltd
Joint call for panel of inquiry on wiretaps against Lebanese-Daily Star
Clinton Reiterates US commitment to Hariri court-Daily Star
Grenade rattles Beirut neighborhood-Daily Star
Mouawad makes way for son-Daily Star
Parant speaks out in interview-Daily Star
UN's Lebanon envoy meets Syrian VP-Daily Star
Israel puts troops on high alert amid fears of revenge for Mughniyeh hit-Daily Star
Part II: How serious is the EU about supporting democracy and human rights in Lebanon?-Daily Star
Students brawl at LU's Hadath campus-Daily Star
Memo to remove confession from records is 'not enough'-Daily Star
US 'committed' to aid for Lebanon - USAID-Daily Star
 

Israel warns of harsh response to any attack by Hezbollah
Date: February 13th, 2009 Source: Haaretz
Israel warned Hezbollah this week that it will respond harshly to any attempt to down an Israel Air Force jet over Lebanon or to avenge last year's assassination of the organization's operations officer, Imad Mughniyeh. Israeli planes routinely fly over southern Lebanon in an effort to collect intelligence about Hezbollah activities, and Israel currently enjoys unchallenged superiority in the air. Any attempt by Hezbollah to deploy anti-aircraft capabilities would alter the balance of power to Israel's detriment. Hezbollah blames Israel for Mughniyeh's death last February 12, though Israel has never admitted responsibility. The defense establishment was therefore on high alert Thursday as Hezbollah marked the one-year anniversary of the assassination. Israel's message was transmitted via Michael Williams, the United Nations envoy to Lebanon, who visited Jerusalem earlier this week to meet with Israeli officials. Foreign Ministry Director General Aharon Abramovitz, one of the officials with whom Williams met, told him that Israel would reject any effort by Hezbollah to evade responsibility for an attack originating in Lebanon by blaming other, smaller, terrorist groups. He also warned that Israel's response would target not only Hezbollah, but also the Lebanese government, of which Hezbollah is a member.

Bassil is not against Lebanese- Israeli negotiations: the engagement between “FPM” and “Hezbollah” is not absolute
Date: February 13th, 2009 Source: Ettihad
The Political Relations officer at the Free Patriotic Movement “FPM” Minister of Telecommunications Gebran Bassil said that he doesn’t “object Lebanese- Israeli direct or indirect negotiations and that the “engagement” of FPM and Hezbollah is “neither absolute nor eternal”.
Bassil was quoted by the “Ettihad” newspaper on the sidelines of the UAE- Lebanon summit talks, as he was part of the delegation that accompanied President Michel Sleiman on his Gulf tour. Bassil defended the attitude of Hezbollah on May 7 incidents and denied that those incidents might have led FPM to reconsider its alliance with Hezbollah saying “we reconsider our positions if we commit a mistake”.He said “our alliance with Hezbollah doesn’t rule out the possibility of an alliance with any other Lebanese faction”, adding the “engagement” of FPM and Hezbollah is “neither absolute nor eternal”. Bassil opposed those who say that a sweeping victory of Hezbollah in the upcoming parliamentary elections would cause an imbalance to the existing political structure because the size of the political party will not enable it to go beyond constitutional customs and laws. On his party’s stance as for holding Lebanese- Israeli peace negotiations such like the Syrian- Israeli negotiations with a Turkish mediation, Bassil said “if negotiations with Israel will solve the crisis of the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon, why not?”

National Bloc: Aoun’s campaign against supporters of sovereignty is odd to the Christian principles
Date: February 12th, 2009 Source: free Lebanon
The executive committee of the national Bloc party criticized MP Michel Aoun’s campaigns against freedom and sovereignty holders, from Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir to martyr PM Rafic Hariri and both journalists Wardeh Zamel and May Chidiac. After its periodic meeting, the party said in a statement that “this shameful, immoral and inhuman act, is far from the Christian principles, especially against the martyrdom Aoun pretends defending.” The National Bloc Amid Carlos Edde has constantly criticized MP Michel Aoun and particularly after his visit to Syria. “The National Bloc party bends in front of the fourth memorial of the martyrdom of PM Rafic Hariri and his companions and calls for discovering the truth,” the statement continued. The party called “the Lebanese to steadfast in front of the attempts to eliminate their country, so the blood of the martyrs won’t be in vain.”

Gunmen Snatch MEA Official at Beirut Airport
Naharnet/Angry citizens of the southern town of Maghdousheh on Thursday blocked the main road leading to the Apple Province to protest against the kidnapping earlier in the day of their fellow citizen Youssef Sader near Beirut Airport. Sader, a ranking official of Middle East Airline's IT department, was kidnapped after driving through the Lebanese Army checkpoint at the entrance to Beirut Airport. Sader's brother, Antoine, said unidentified gunmen snatched Youssef in an area within 100 meters from the Army checkpoint, just before driving into the MEA headquarters. Beirut, 12 Feb 09, 21:11

U.N. Investigators in Syria on Eve of Hariri's Murder Anniversary
Naharnet/A large group of U.N. investigators headed to Syria on the eve of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri's fourth assassination anniversary, the National News Agency reported Friday. The NNA said that the investigators left their headquarters in Monteverde Hotel in four dark-colored SUVs passing through the Masnaa border crossing on their way to Syria. The U.N. investigating commission has been set up to probe the Feb. 14, 2005 assassination of Hariri and related crimes. Investigators have already met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus. They have also questioned several Syrian officials. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 11:18

Kerry Includes Lebanon in Mideast Tour
Naharnet/U.S. Democratic Senator John Kerry will include Lebanon in next week's tour of the Middle East, An-Nahar daily reported Friday.
On Thursday, Kerry's spokesman said the senator planned to leave next Friday and visit Egypt, Jordan, Israel, the Palestinian Territories, Syria, and stop in London on the way home. He did not mention Lebanon. However, An-Nahar quoted credible sources as saying that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had "convinced Kerry of the need to make a stopover in Beirut." The turn of events came two days after Kerry, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations committee, told An-Nahar that Lebanon had not been included in the trip due to time constraints. During their breakfast meeting on Thursday, however, Clinton advised Kerry that a visit to Beirut was necessary to avoid giving the "wrong impression" both in and outside Lebanon, An-Nahar reported. The senator "accepted her advice and decided to add Lebanon to his tour." In Damascus, Kerry was to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, as well as Foreign Minister Walid Muallem and other officials, said committee communications director Frederick Jones. Despite media reports that Kerry would travel with House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Howard Berman, a fellow Democrat, Jones said he would go alone and Berman's spokeswoman declined to discuss any travel plans.
The senator's trip came after former president George Bush's administration repeatedly complained about U.S. lawmakers visiting Syria, charging that they might undermine Bush's hard-line policy. However, State Department acting spokesman Robert Wood showed no sign of objecting to such trips.
"There is a new administration," Wood said when asked about travel to Syria. "And the secretary has been very clear that she wants members of Congress to travel." He specified, though, he was referring to a general travel policy.(Naharnet-AFP) Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 10:41

Wiretapping Crisis Escalates As Police Chief Accuses Bassil of Withholding Data
Naharnet/The wiretapping crisis has spurred sky-high as Police chief Gen. Ashraf Rifi accused Telecommunications Minister Jebran Bassil of withholding data from security services. News reports on Friday said a meeting on Thursday of the Media and Communications Committee was very hot, particularly when Rifi accused Bassil of withholding data from security services. The conferees – including some 40 MPs from various political sides, the interior and justice ministers as well as General Security head Wafiq Jezzini and Police chief Gen. Ashraf Rifi -- agreed Thursday to move toward the establishment of a parliamentary investigative committee to look into the wiretapping issue. Rifi accused Bassil of withholding data from security services on three different occasions: The first from July 27, 2008 for a period of 14 days, the second on Sept. 10, 2008 when pro-Syrian Lebanese politician Saleh Aridi was assassinated and the third on Jan. 19, 2009. Rifi, according to the daily Al Akhbar newspaper, also accused New TV and Syrian Intelligence of tapping his phone, citing a telephone conversation aired by the television between him and Lebanese detainee Ahmed Merhi who has links to al-Qaida. Al Akhbar said Bassil presented documents issued during the period when Marwan Hamadeh was Telecommunications Minister showing General Prosecutor Saeed Mirza's approval for citizens' requests to wiretap certain phone numbers on Lebanon's two cell phone companies. Hamadeh announced that Thursday's meeting "showed that Syrian intelligence was responsible for eavesdropping" on all phone calls.
When confronted with the truth that Orascom Telecom owns 10 percent shares of Orange, an Israeli wireless telecommunications service provider, Bassil said he has documents that deny the claim, Al Mustaqbal newspaper reported Friday. It said Bassil, however, failed to present any document.
MP Ghazi Youssef, meanwhile, hinted that March 14 MPs would propose debriefing Bassil and subsequently seek a no-confidence vote against him.
Another MP who took part in Thursday's session told the daily Al Liwa that Jizzini defended Bassil, pointing to the right given to Securite Generale (General Security) to be responsible for eavesdropping. Bassil is scheduled to hold a press conference on Friday to respond to the allegations. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 09:10

Feltman Says U.S. Support for Tribunal Is 'Non-Negotiable' and 'Irreversible'
Naharnet/Acting Principle Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffrey Feltman, reiterated U.S. backing for the international tribunal that will try the suspected killers of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri, saying that such support was "non-negotiable" and "irreversible."Feltman said in remarks published Friday in An-Nahar daily that the current U.S. administration "does not know who was behind Hariri's assassination. "But what we do know, and what we want to stress, is that we will help the tribunal with all means possible to uncover and punish the killers and those who back them. It is high time to make absolutely sure that crimes of political assassinations in Lebanon will not remain unpunished," he added. The remarks were translated to English by Naharnet.
Referring to ongoing mediation efforts to revive Israeli-Syrian peace talks, Feltman assured the Lebanese that President Barack Obama "plans to review the U.S. policy in the region" in an indirect implication to Syria and Iran. "But this does not at all mean that any future decision by the new administration will compromise Lebanon or (Lebanon's) independence or sovereignty," said Feltman, who is also former U.S. ambassador to Lebanon. Feltman said that the U.S. "goal has been and still is to help the Lebanese govern themselves and become accountable to the Lebanese people." He added that the United States wants the Lebanese government to "satisfy the needs of the Lebanese people, not (to satisfy) us or Syria or any other party."Meanwhile, An-Nahar reported that officials from the U.S. State Department and other U.S. sources told the newspaper that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had decided to officially appoint Feltman her deputy assistant for Near Eastern affairs. However, Feltman refused to confirm or deny these reports. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 10:06

12,000 Employees Manning Polling Centers Will Be Able to Vote
Naharnet/Public service employees tasked with manning polling centers during Election Day June 7 will be able to vote, pan-Arab daily Al Hayat reported Friday.
It said the justice ministry has recently received a memorandum from the interior ministry setting June 4 voting date for city employees who will be supervising the election process. Al Hayat quoted senior justice ministry sources as saying the number of public service employees to take part in the "extraordinary" voting day is between 11,000 to 12,000. The sources said around 5,200 polling centers are to be distributed among electoral constituencies, meaning one station for every 800 voters with two servants manning each one. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 12:06

U.S. Provides $12 Million to Lebanese Police
Naharnet/The U.S. embassy said it has provided Lebanese police with an additional $ 12 million for communications upgrades and Nahr al-Bared security.
A statement by the U.S. embassy in Beirut said Ambassador Michele Sison signed an amendment to the 2007 letter of agreement with Internal Security Forces chief Gen. Ashraf Rifi. It said the amendment provides an additional $12 million in "U.S. bilateral assistance to the program with the Lebanese Government to enhance the capacity of the ISF." "With this addition, the U.S. Government is providing $80 million to the ISF over a four year period," the statement said.
"This additional funding will enable the ISF to construct a community focused police station in the Nahr al-Bared area, to be trained in community policing to serve the Nahr al-Bared Palestinian Refugee camp; and, the funding will provide modern communication systems to the ISF and is the first phase of a planned nationwide system," it added. The statement said that law enforcement assistance program assists the ISF to enforce the rule of law and protect the Lebanese people within their sovereign state. It said professional development of the ISF is critical for Lebanon's sovereignty and security. The statement reiterated the U.S. Government's commitment to supporting Lebanon, the ISF and the Lebanese people. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 13:09

Jumblat to Send 'Positive' Message to Hizbullah at Feb. 14 Rally
Naharnet/Democratic Gathering leader Walid Jumblat will reportedly send a positive message to Hizbullah during the rally to be held on Saturday to mark the fourth assassination anniversary of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.The daily As Safir on Friday said Jumblat's speech will go beyond "calm."It said the Druze leader is expected to send "positive" messages to his opponents, particularly Hizbullah. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 10:12

State Budget Again Postponed Till Next Thursday
Naharnet/Cabinet has postponed until next Thursday a session to discuss the 2009 state budget after ministers again failed to agree on funds for the Council for the South. Cabinet, which held Thursday an ordinary session under President Michel Suleiman in Baabda, tackled issues like sand and rock quarries and a government plan to face the repercussions of the global financial crisis on Lebanon. Information Minister Tareq Mitri, however, said at the end of the meeting around 10 pm that he cannot "promise" the Lebanese that Cabinet would be able to approve a budget plan next Thursday. Health Minister Mohammed Jawad Khalife hinted that Suleiman is working for a settlement of the budget crisis and expected a breakthrough before Thursday's Cabinet meeting. Meanwhile, Finance Minister Mohammed Shatah explained that the amount of funding needed for the Council for the South budget is LL 90 billion and not just LL 60 billion, adding that Cabinet decided on this issue after examining the projects. Cabinet decided to issue 150,000 passports for expatriates so that they can take part in the forthcoming parliamentary elections. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 08:44

Nayla Tueni: Martyrs' Blood Liberated Lebanon
Naharnet/An-Nahar daily's assistant general manager, Nayla Tueni, stressed on Thursday that the blood of Lebanese officials killed since ex-Premier Rafik Hariri's assassination liberated Lebanon from Syrian rule."Their blood liberated Lebanon from Syrian occupation," Tueni, who is competing in Beirut's first constituency, said. According to Tueni, the blood shed by the martyrs put the spotlight back on Lebanon. "The issue of (Lebanon's) sovereignty and freedom became a United Nations priority," she said. Ex-Premier Rafik Hariri's fourth assassination anniversary is aimed at "consolidating nation and sovereignty stances" that Hariri was killed for on Feb. 14, 2005. Beirut, 13 Feb 09, 11:54

Obama Supports U.N. Moves to Punish Hariri Killers
Naharnet/U.S. President Barack Obama Thursday vowed to support U.N. moves to bring to justice the killers of slain Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
The tribunal will try those presumed responsible for a series of attacks on Lebanese political and media personalities, notably the assassination of Hariri in a car bombing in February 2005 that also killed 22 others. "As we share our grief with the Lebanese people over the loss of Prime Minister Hariri, we also share our conviction that his sacrifice will not be in vain," Obama said in a statement. "The United States fully supports the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, whose work will begin in a few weeks, to bring those responsible for this horrific crime and those that followed to justice." The tribunal will have 11 judges, including four from Lebanon. Obama added in his statement that as Lebanon prepared for parliamentary elections in June, "the United States will continue to support Lebanon's sovereignty and independence, the legitimate institutions of the Lebanese state, and the Lebanese people. "We also will continue to support the voices of peace and moderation in Lebanon, and hope that Lebanon continues down the path of national reconciliation, peace, and prosperity that its citizens so strongly deserve," the U.S. president added. The statement added that the United States supported U.N. resolutions 1701 and 1559, ending the 2006 Israel-Hizbullah war and calling on all foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanese territories.(AFP) Beirut, 12 Feb 09, 17:38

Rafic Hariri and the 2009 Elections
Walid Choucair
Al-Hayat - 13/02/09//
Lebanese will remember Rafic Hariri on Saturday when they mark the fourth anniversary of his assassination, as they have done every year since 14 February 2005. That was the day when the murderers carried out their crime with the hatred of a thousand kilograms of explosives - the hatred of an individual that one usually finds only in mafia movies.
Many of those who liked Hariri and were his friends prefer not to mix politics with this anniversary; they would rather commemorate this exceptional man and his personal traits, which rendered him a unique phenomenon. It is rare for such political, social and humane traits to be gathered in a single individual, as was the case for the late Hariri.
Since Hariri combined these various traits and distinctions, there are many people who want to express their sympathy and sadness over losing him. Everyone who participates in the mass gatherings that take place every year to commemorate his passing finds one or more distinctions or traits to admire in Rafic Hariri, which differ from those seen by other individuals and groups who gather at his tomb, which from the first instant has bothered his rivals. Thus, the latter have continued to wonder, for the last four years, why this tomb remains open and has not "shut down."
Some of the opposition rivals of the March 14 coalition understand the meaning of this "personal identification" with Hariri among various groups of the wide public that goes down to the Martyrs' Square in downtown Beirut. These political leaders avoid criticizing the ceremony, even though the political consequences of such an event are not in their interest. Others find no embarrassment in making criticisms or saying that "martyrdom has lost its meaning," or that "the martyr has become an election check that is being cashed," as General Michel Aoun, the head of the Free Patriotic Movement put it. Earlier, in the last two years, such statements were also made by the leaders of the pro-Syrian camp, who overlook the "personal relationship" between Hariri and this wide public. For Aoun and the allies of Syria, the goal is to destroy Hariri's symbolism. However, this is counterproductive, even if the general dresses up his opinion in "the protocols of the sects," as he did in his campaign against the government's designating the day a public holiday.
We can understand how some Hariri supporters want to remember the individual "without too much politics," while others criticize this personalization of the event. But we should not hide the political import of the commemoration and the assassination itself; the significance is multi-faceted, just like the Lebanese crisis. The man was eliminated because he was able, due to his personal traits and qualities, to move the crisis in directions that were not in the interest of those who eliminated him.
In this context, the opponents of the groups that commemorate February 14 cannot blame those who use the event for electoral purposes. One of the reasons for Hariri's assassination in 2005 was to prevent the certain change in the Lebanese Parliament's balance of power that was to come in the elections (which took place in the spring of that year), which would cause a transformation in the political management of Lebanon. The crime had the opposite effect: the groups that were assumed to be headed for elimination after Hariri's killing managed to win the majority of seats. This is what led Lebanon's political system, since that time, to be based on changing the balance of power via the street, and then by weapons (during the May 7 events).
When some opposition figures deny one of the political goals of the assassination (to influence the elections), it is like denying the family of the victim's right to commemorate the anniversary; it is like denying that the assassination itself took place, or ignoring it and turning it into a "passing event."
The 2005 elections blocked the process of retaining Lebanon in its entirety as a negotiating card with the administration of George Bush. Some of Lebanon turned into a source of pressure on this administration, through the alliance of Iran and Syria with a portion of the Lebanese. The 2009 elections will be subject to something similar. On the eve of the Obama administration's negotiations with Iran and Syria, the identity of the majority in Lebanon will determine an important part of the deal-making that will take place. In the event of a victory by the March 8 coalition forces, led by Hezbollah and Syria, Obama will have to acknowledge the renewed influence of this group, along with Iran, in this small country. Didn't the deputy head of Hezbollah's politburo, Mahmoud Qmati, say last week that the "resistance (political) project is gaining… in light of the American flocking to Syria, and soon Iran"?
If the March 14 coalition wins in the elections, the settlement between Washington, Tehran and Damascus might have to take into consideration a renewed sense of Lebanese independence. This makes 14 February 2009 extremely important

Week before Gaza op, Israel and Syria were ready for direct talks
By Zvi Barel /Harretz
13/02/2009
Israel and Syria were about to announce that they would speak directly a week before the fighting in Gaza broke out, a Turkish official said. Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan had spoken with Syrian President Bashar Assad during Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's visit to Ankara, and had mediated in crafting a joint statement.
But a few days later, while still awaiting Olmert's approval for the statement, Israel launched Operation Cast Lead in Gaza and Erdogan felt betrayed.
"Nobody imagined that Olmert would go behind Erdogan's back like that and not even hint that he intended to start fighting in Gaza," the Turkish official said.
Erdogan had invited Olmert to his official residence after he met Turkey's president. He suggested calling Assad and drafting a joint announcement about a direct discussion between the Israeli and Syrian delegations.
The source said Erdogan called Assad, told him that Olmert was at his residence and asked whether he would accept Erdogan's mediation. Assad agreed and the two began drafting the statement.
Every few minutes Erdogan's assistant brought Olmert, who was in another room, notes from Erdogan's talk with Assad and asked for his comments. Erdogan passed Olmert's comments on to Assad and took down his responses, which he then passed on to Olmert.
The source said the three-way conversation continued for more than four hours, until about 1 A.M. Olmert told Erdogan he must return to Israel. Erdogan said he would continue talking to Assad and call Olmert the next day for his comments.
"The joint Syrian-Israeli statement was nearly finished and needed only a few corrected words to be completed," the Turkish source said.
"After making the statement, the parties were to announce that they were ready to start direct negotiations and Erdogan was convinced that he had an agreed-on draft," the source said. The statement had been expected to include an agreement to adhere to the understanding reached with Yitzhak Rabin.
This stipulated that Israel would be prepared to withdraw from the entire Golan in exchange for permanent peace and security arrangements, as well as agreement on what the term normalization would mean for future peaceful relations.
But a week later, Israel launched the offensive in Gaza. When Erdogan heard of the attack he said that Olmert had stabbed him in the back and that Israel must pay for it, one of his aides said.

Hariri Would Not Forget May 7, But would Eventually Forgive
Naharnet/Mustaqbal Movement leader Saad Hariri on Thursday said the March 14 alliance does not want to hurl Lebanon into the Intra-Palestinian dispute and said he did not forget the May 7 assault by Hizbullah and allies but would "eventually forgive because we have to live together."
Hariri, in a television interview, also said his Mustaqbal movement would compete in the forthcoming election within the unified March 14 ticket.
He criticized as "shameful" verbal attacks by Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun on organizing a rally to commemorate the fourth anniversary of his father's assassination. Hariri paid tribute to Progressive Socialist leader Walid Jumblat for leading the March 14 alliance upon the assassination of ex-Premier Rafik Hariri in 2005. A smiling Hariri also declared support for "any centrist bloc" that calls for Lebanon's independence, sovereignty, stability and defends the nation's pluralist nature.
He said the Hizbullah-led March 8 factions are "mere corruption" and called for forming a parliamentary committee to investigate corruption charges.
Hariri declared support for the Army Command and said Jumblat has the right to ask questions about the performance of certain departments and "his questions should be answered." He denied reports that Mustaqbal Movement was arming up partisans, recalling that "we are against civil war." Beirut, 12 Feb 09, 23:06

Hezbollah not to revenge its commander's assassination
www.chinaview.cn 2009-02-13
by Suzan Haidamous
BEIRUT, Feb. 12 (Xinhua) -- One year has passed since Lebanon's Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyeh was killed in a car bomb in Damascus. The Lebanese Shiite armed group had vowed to revenge against Israel, which was accused of carrying out the assassination, however, no action has been taken until now.
Local political analysts have been ruling out a respond by Hezbollah in the near future, due to local and regional reasons, military analyst Elias Hanna told the local Daily Star. "The decision is not fully in the hands of Hezbollah, although Hezbollah is being pressured by its people to respond," Hanna said, adding that the potential resuming of the indirect Syria-Israeli talks, and the new improvement of relations between U.S. and Iran, leave Hezbollah hand cuffed.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah denied being commanded by Iran or Syria on this issue, and its chief Hasan Nasrallah renewed last month the promise to revenge Mughniyeh's death. "Hezbollah will keep the card of Mughniyeh's revenge in its hand until the right time comes," Braham Makdad, a Hezbollah supporter, told Xinhua.
Makdad, who lives in the stronghold of Hezbollah in the southern suburbs, stressed that the people have not yet recovered from the 2006 war outcomes, and are not enthusiastic about a new war, but still, he added, Hezbollah cannot forget the revenge of Mughniyeh because "nothing would deter Israel from killing Hezbollah commanders and officials." Israeli troops on Thursday were put on high alert on the northern borders for the anniversary of Mughniyeh, to thwart any attempt by Hezbollah to retaliate. "Israelis are living in fear of our revenge. Don't expect me to say when we will strike," Nasrallah said, threatening to retaliate "in any place, at any time and in any way."
Nasrallah accused Israel of Mughniyeh's assassination, but the Jewish state denied the charge. However, the Israeli popular daily Yedioth Ahronoth reported last week that Israeli Mossad agents didkill Mughniyeh after the CIA shared information obtained from a Hezbollah operator captured in Iraq.
Hezbollah chief was known to keep his promises, local political analysts said, while Israeli officials have regularly promised a massive respond to any Hezbollah attack.
Nasrallah is scheduled to deliver a speech on the assassination anniversary occasion next Monday, and he has to explain the delay in the revenge he promised.
Whether Hezbollah is planning a revenge operation soon or is preparing for the right time is a question that cannot be answered by observers, but, Hezbollah should prepare answers for their supporters.

Israel is his top priority
By Akiva Eldar /Haaretz
Last update - 20:55 12/02/2009
Likudniks don't scare former United States president Jimmy Carter. On the contrary: The electoral turnaround of 1977 that brought them to power for the first time enabled Carter to be inscribed in the history books as the leader who facilitated the first peace agreement between Israelis and Arabs. In his new book, "We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land" (Simon & Schuster), Carter relates that neither he nor America's Jewish community knew what to expect from prime minister Menachem Begin, a former underground fighter who had acquired a bad name for himself as a war-mongering fanatic. Egyptian president Anwar Sadat reported to Carter that he had asked Eastern European leaders who knew the new prime minister whether Begin was an honest man and a strong person. According to him, the answers were in the affirmative. In a telephone interview before this week's election, I asked Carter what he thinks of Likud chairman Benjamin Netanyahu. From his office at the Carter Center in Atlanta, the 39th U.S. president answered calmly that Netanyahu is a practical politician, and that if a proposed peace agreement wins broad support among the Israeli public, the Likud leader would not turn his back on it, and would be "constructive."
Carter does remember, however, that he had differences of opinion with Netanyahu, who argued - in contrast to Ariel Sharon, who as Begin's agriculture minister, enthusiastically supported a peace agreement with Egypt - that relinquishing Sinai would be harmful to Israel. Still, Carter thinks it is also important to note that during Netanyahu's first term as prime minister, he sent out feelers to Syria regarding the Golan Heights.
The need for an immediate renewal of Israel's peace process with Syria, as well as with the Palestinians and Lebanon, was one of the topics of the conversation last month between the 84-year-old Nobel Peace Prize laureate and the newly elected 44th U.S. president, Barack Obama. The elderly peace activist says he came away with the feeling that he had burst through an open door.
Peace plan outline
Carter's latest book begins with a personal confession concerning the use of the word "apartheid" on the cover of his previous book ("Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid"), and ends with an outline for an American peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians. It includes the demilitarization of the Palestinian state and the introduction of peacekeeping forces; a withdrawal to the 1967 boundaries, with border adjustments in Jerusalem and its surroundings, in exchange for alternative territories for the Palestinians; shared control over Jerusalem's Old City; a Palestinian right of return to the territories only; and monetary compensation for the refugees. Carter proposed setting this September as the target for achieving these goals or at least for evaluating the progress and the remaining difficulties.
There are voices in the Israeli peace camp who believe that the United States, as well as other countries in the West, should be sending a clearer message to Israel about the military operation in Gaza, which not only cost the lives of so many, but also undermined the support, peace and trust of many Palestinians as well as Israelis in the process.
Carter: "Yes, I believe that's true. I'm very gratified to see the choice that President Obama has made of a peace envoy: George Mitchell. In my opinion, he's the best American he could possibly have chosen for that task and it may be that, with the strong backing of the White House and some direct American involvement in the negotiations, we'll see some progress made."
Do you think that if Israel had accepted the document you brought from Damascus [in April 2008], from Hamas leader Khaled Meshal, we could have avoided this last round of violence in Gaza?
"Absolutely ... And Meshal and his entire politburo, top members, were committed to that. To stop the rockets completely and to observe the cease-fire would open up the gates and let the people there have food, water, medicine and fuel.
"Hamas had offered to extend the cease-fire in December, but the Israelis were not willing to do it. I have met twice with Hamas leaders during this past year and both times that seems to be the only thing that they demanded - that there be no more attacks by either side, and that the crossings be opened, so that at least a moderate amount of food and water and medicine and fuel be permitted to come in to the people in Gaza.
"I don't have any doubt that Gaza could be peaceful if the one and a half million people there could get adequate food and supplies and have access to the outside world. But when you imprison that many Palestinians, of all political persuasions, and deprive them of the basic necessities of life, and also of freedom to move back and forth between there and the West Bank - or there and Egypt, or there and Jordan, or there and the ocean - then you breed dissension and that dissension is going to be expressed in violence."
In your opinion, why is Israel doing this?
"I don't understand why. Unless it's an attempt to punish the people in Gaza so badly that [they] will turn politically against Hamas. But I think that has proven to be a fallacy."
'Two separate issues'
Noting similarities between Hamas and Hezbollah, Carter says: "I think that Hezbollah in Lebanon has now gotten a very substantial status, as part of a major political organization. I was in Lebanon in December to help them prepare for an [upcoming] election, and Hezbollah and the other similar groups there might very well gain substantial [electoral] strength."
You have spoken to Meshal recently about captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. What are the chances that he will be home soon?
"When I met with the leaders in Damascus, they said he was well and alive, and so one of my requests to them was to get a letter written from him to his parents so they would know he was okay.
"I think that a good negotiator could work out an accommodation between Israel and Palestinians on a prisoner exchange that would result in the freedom of Shalit. But I don't think it's advisable to tie that to a cease-fire. I think they ought to be two separate issues."
Would you advocate Israel speaking directly with Hamas?
"Well, I think there needs to be a step-by-step process. The first step, in my opinion, in an overall peace agreement - there's got to be some reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas. And that can go forward, I believe, if the United States and Israel would give it our tacit support, our strong support."
Carter points out that Meshal has said that "Hamas would accept any agreement negotiated between [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] Abu Mazen and Israeli authorities if it was submitted to the Palestinian people in a referendum and got a positive vote. So, it's not a hopeless case to have good-faith talks based on a two-state solution that would be approved by the Palestinians."
Would you advocate a change in the American attitude toward Hamas?
"Yes. I think it's absolutely important that Hamas be involved in any sort of peace process. In fact, I don't know what the relative popularity is of Hamas - I haven't seen any public opinion polls since the invasion and attack on Gaza, but I was the main observer in 2006, in January, when Hamas won a majority of the parliamentary seats. And as you know, almost all of those candidates who won, who lived in the West Bank, are now in Israeli prisons. So that means that the Hamas and Fatah unity government can't be formed at all. It's not an elected government there representing the Palestinian people; it's just a temporary government, basically appointed just to avoid having Hamas members."
George Mitchell visited Israel and the West Bank, and he went to Jordan and Egypt, but he avoided seeing Syrian President Bashar Assad.
"I know. I think that was just his first trip, where he's probably trying to refresh his memory, and learn the latest developments over there. But I have confidence that in the future, without too much delay, the United States will have diplomatic relations with Syria once again. When I go to the Middle East, I always go to Syria because I've known Bashar Assad since he was a college student, in London. When I go over there I enjoy meeting with him. I find him to be quite intelligent, and quite eager to have an agreement with Israel. And to be supportive, not only of the Golan Heights issue providing peace, but also supportive of the Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement."
The former president adds that he believes that if Assad feels comfortable with the United States and with Israel, he can also play a positive role vis-a-vis Hamas and Hezbollah.
You often sound like you're more concerned about the future of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state than many Israelis.
"I am. I'm deeply concerned about it. I would say that the top priority in my life, for international affairs in the last 30 years, has been to see Israel as a Jewish state living in security and peace. That's a number one priority that I have in my life. I'm getting old now, but I'm still active, and that's still a very high priority for me.
"I've known the history of the Jewish people, the Hebrew people, the Israelites, and I've taught these things every Sunday since I was 18 years old. So I'm deeply committed as a Christian to seeing the covenant with Abraham fulfilled," says Carter, noting that peace in the Middle East is also "a key to tremendously reducing the level of animosity against my own country, and reducing the commitment to violence through terrorist acts."
Do you believe it's also an American blunder that, in spite of U.S. policy and warnings and messages, the settlements kept growing and they keep growing actually as we speak?
"That's true. When I first visited the West Bank and the Golan Heights in 1973, I think there were only 1,500 Jewish settlers in the occupied territories. I think that [the expansion] happened particularly in the last 16 years. George Bush, Sr. was very strict in deterring, I think, then-prime minister [Yitzhak] Shamir from building settlements, and even withheld several hundred million dollars in U.S. aid from Israel because of a large settlement between Jerusalem and Bethlehem. And Shamir backed down because of that. But under president [Bill] Clinton and president George W. Bush, the settlements have not been deterred by influence from the United States, which is a mistake."
Carter is asked whether, after the traumatic evacuation of Gush Katif, it would be possible to remove approximately 120,000-130,000 settlers from the West Bank, and whether NATO countries will go along with his proposal to send forces there. He says he definitely believes that, within the context of a peace agreement, Israel will evacuate settlements. He also does not discount the possibility that U.S. forces could "assure that during the transition period, there wouldn't be any threats to Israel from Palestinians or to Palestinians from Israel."
The former president adds that "another option might have been Turkey, since a few weeks ago, Turkey and Israel were fairly friendly" - or alternatively any Arab or Muslim country that would be acceptable to both sides.
How do you see the solution to the problem of Iran's nuclear program?
"I spent several days studying the maps and looking at the flight paths and the distances and so forth, because my profession was military as well, so I'm familiar with how far a plane can fly, of different types, and how much fuel that requires. When you have to go 2,000 miles round trip, you're going to have to refuel somewhere, over Iraq or over Saudi Arabia, which would be very difficult, or you'd have to carry a very tiny bomb to drop. You know you can't have both.
"I think that that kind of attack would not be effective in destroying Iran's plans for nuclear power ..., but I think it would enhance the support that Arab countries are giving Iran. I think Iran has been greatly strengthened in the last few years - by the war in Iraq, which I think was unnecessary, and also by the lack of progress on meeting the legitimate needs of the Palestinians. So if we can get out of Iraq, and if we could bring peace to the Palestinians - those two factors in themselves would greatly reduce the influence of Iran."

Israel, Hezbollah: Has deterrence worked?
As anniversary of Hezbollah commander Mughniyah's assassination looms, Israel tightens security.
By Nicholas Blanford | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the February 13, 2009 edition
E-mail a friend Print this Letter to the Editor Republish ShareThisE-mail newsletters RSS Correspondent Nicholas Blanford discusses the impact left behind in Lebanon by the late Imad Mughniyah.
Beirut, Lebanon - When Imad Mughniyah, Hezbollah's top military commander, was assassinated by a car bomb in Damascus one year ago, the militant Shiite group blamed Israel – which denied involvement – and vowed revenge. But a year on, that vow remains unfulfilled.
While Israel is taking no chances and has tightened security ahead of the Mughniyah anniversary, Israeli officials repeatedly have claimed that threats of massive retaliation to a Hezbollah revenge attack have deterred the Shiite group.
"On the one hand, Hezbollah is driven by its desire to carry out an attack as revenge for the death of Mughniyah ... but they do not want to start a war," Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, Israel's military intelligence chief, told the Israeli cabinet in a briefing two weeks ago.
Deterrence and counter deterrence have shaped the Israeli-Arab conflict for decades. Israel relies on the threat of overwhelming military force to cow its Arab enemies. While its military superiority in the past has dealt crushing blows to Arab conventional armies, Israel has struggled to find a means of deterring a new generation of enemies, the smaller sub-state guerrilla movements exemplified by Hezbollah and Hamas.
"These guys are not intimidated by the Israelis," says Timur Goksel, former senior official with the UN peacekeeping force in south Lebanon. "They are ideologically driven and don't have the same responsibilities as a state."
That is why many analysts in Lebanon believe that Hezbollah will respond to Mr. Mughniyah's assassination with a calculated strategic blow to deter further assassinations and restore a balance of deterrence between the two foes.
"The retaliation is a strategic necessity for Hezbollah. In fact, it would be suicidal if Hezbollah did not respond," says Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a Lebanese specialist on the group.
Analysts say Hezbollah's targeting and timing of a retaliation is more dependent on its multiple, sometimes conflicting, obligations toward its Lebanese Shiite constituents, domestic political allies, ideological interests, and backers in Syria and Iran. Few doubt that a reprisal will come.
"It is necessary to respond to the killing of martyr leader ... Mughniyah to punish the killers," said Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's leader, in a press conference two weeks ago.
Israel's deterrent capability has suffered several blows in recent years. Hezbollah's bombs and bullets drove the Israeli army out of south Lebanon in 2000. Six years later, Israel failed to defeat Hezbollah's battle-hardened guerrillas in a month-long war. The recent three-week onslaught against Hamas in Gaza was, in part, an attempt to show it had learned the lessons of the 2006 war. But with rockets still being fired into Israel nearly a month after the cease-fire, many military analysts question whether the offensive succeeded in restoring Israel's deterrence.
A report released this month by the Center for Strategic and International Studies concluded that while the Israeli army performed more effectively in Gaza than in Lebanon, its tactical gains against Hamas were short-term and no clear strategic benefit was achieved.
"Israel does not seem to have been properly prepared for the political dimensions of the war, or to have had any clear plan and cohesive leadership for achieving conflict termination," wrote military analyst Anthony Cordesman. "Moreover, it seems to have approached the fighting, and the Arab world, from a strategic perspective that will increase instability in the region and ultimately weaken Israel's security."
Hezbollah long ago recognized the value of deterrence. A month after Israel killed Hezbollah leader Sheikh Abbas Mussawi in February 1992, a suicide bomber blew up the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires, killing 29 people. While Hezbollah denied responsibility, Israel refrained from assassinating top Hezbollah figures for the next 16 years. During Israel's occupation of south Lebanon in the 1990s, Hezbollah fired rockets into Israel whenever Israeli forces caused Lebanese civilian casualties. The tit-for-tat tactic helped impose restrictions on the Israeli army's freedom of action in south Lebanon.
After Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah staged periodic attacks against an Israeli-occupied sliver of mountainside called the Shebaa Farms. The attacks were calibrated to needle Israel without eliciting heavy reprisals that could backfire on the party's domestic standing. Similarly, Israel for six years adopted a policy of restraint, recognizing that a disproportionate response would draw rocket salvos on northern Israel.
That "balance of terror" was upset in July 2006 when Hezbollah fighters abducted two Israeli soldiers and Israel responded with war.
Since 2006, Hezbollah and Israel have tried to establish new means of deterrence. Israel has warned that it will flatten Hezbollah-supporting areas of Lebanon in the event of another war. And it remains the chief suspect in Mughniyah's killing, suggesting it has abandoned its moratorium on targeting senior Hezbollah officials.
Though Hezbollah has frozen its attacks on the Shebaa Farms, it has mounted a rearmament, recruitment, and training drive and drawn up fresh battle plans. Israeli intelligence says Hezbollah has amassed three times the number of rockets it had at the start of the 2006 war.
"The Zionists will discover that the war they had in July [2006] was a walk in the park if we compare it to what we've prepared for every new aggression," Sheikh Nasrallah warned in January.

White House warms to thaw in ties with Syria
By Daniel Dombey in Washington/Financial Times
February 13 2009
US diplomats and officials are stepping up efforts to improve relations with Syria, in moves that mark a break with George W. Bush’s policy of isolating Damascus.
To date, Washington has declined to confirm Syrian reports that the US had permitted two Syrian Boeing 747s to be repaired, even though the country is on the US’s list of state sponsors of terrorism. But on Thursday, the state department set out reasons why Boeing should be allowed to do such work.
EDITOR’S CHOICE
In depth: Obama’s first 100 days - Feb-03Editorial Comment: Obama’s first, confident steps - Jan-23Obama urges Israel to open Gaza borders - Jan-23Obama orders Guantánamo closure - Jan-23Obama ushers in an ‘era of openness’ - Jan-21Obama: We must change with the world - Jan-21“There are ways that we can try to provide, for example, in the case of Syria ... spare parts that may be needed to ensure that there is continued safety in the aviation industry,” a state department spokesman said.
Further emphasis on US-Syrian ties is set to come next week, when John Kerry, chairman of the Senate foreign relations ­committee, visits Damascus. Although Mr Kerry’s office stresses he is not an emissary of the new US administration, he discussed his plans on Thursday at a breakfast meeting with Hillary Clinton, secretary of state.
Mr Kerry has visited Syria twice before and has repeatedly called for the US to send an ambassador to Damascus.
The Bush administration recalled its ambassador after the 2005 assassination of Rafiq Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister. Washington and other countries suspect Syria of being involved in the killing, despite Damascus’ protestations to the contrary.
Howard Berman, chairman of the House of Representatives foreign affairs committee, is also likely to visit Syria this month.
Although many countries in the Middle East argue the administration of Barack Obama should focus on helping achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace, some US officials and analysts argue diplomatic engagement with Syria offers better immediate prospects.
They add that greater contacts with Damascus could also help stabilise Iraq and better position the US for negotiations with Iran, which Mr Obama indicated this week are likely to begin in coming months. US officials are wary of a big public move towards Tehran until after Iran’s June elections.
For some time Israeli diplomats have argued that the Bush administration’s refusal to engage with Syria pushed Iran and Syria closer together, so strengthening Tehran.
In testimony at her confirmation hearing in January, Mrs Clinton said that the US should “engage directly” to help Syria-Israel peace talks as well as talking to “all of Iraq’s neighbours”. But in a delicate balancing act, both Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama have issued statements this week marking the fourth anniversary of Mr Hariri’s assassination.
In his comments, Mr Obama called for “those responsible for this horrific crime and those that followed to [be brought to] justice.” Mrs Clinton promised $6m for the United Nations tribunal investigating the crime.
However, the administration’s emerging position on Syria has already been criticised by legislators who emphasise Damascus’ closeness to Iran and its role in harbouring leaders of groups such as Hamas as well as the Hariri investigation.
“The administration is aiding an unrepentant regime and is sending a signal that the US will make concessions and seek dialogue regardless of what the facts dictate,” said Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the ranking Republican on the House foreign affairs committee.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009

Gun permits frozen ahead of rally marking Hariri murder
Slain pm's son, march 14 allies expected to address event
By Nicholas Kimbrell /Daily Star staff
Friday, February 13, 2009
BEIRUT: The Defense Ministry has decided to temporarily suspend all civilian licenses to carry firearms from February 13-15, in preparation for a large rally in memory of slain Prime Minister Rafik Hariri to be held in Downtown Beirut Saturday. A high-ranking Defense Ministry source confirmed that the ban would take affect Friday. "People who have their licenses can keep their guns, but they will not be allowed - even if you have your permit - to carry [between February 13 and 15]," the source said. The official noted that temporary freezes on bearing arms were common before large-scale public events, and said the move was "just a precaution."
"Some people when they carry their arms, they get angry more quickly," the defense official added, without expanding on additional security preparations being made by the army. Security personnel for parliamentary deputies, ministers and high-ranking party officials are exempt from the ban.
The ruling March 14 coalition has called on its supporters to turn out in full force to commemorate Hariri's 2005 assassination, as well as the deaths of security officials and predominantly anti-Syrian lawmakers and journalists killed since.
Hariri, a five-time prime minister, was killed in a massive car bomb in Beirut's Ain al-Mreisseh neighborhood on February 14, 2005, which also took the lives of more than 20 others including former Economyc and Trade Minister Bassil Fuleihan. The popular demonstrations following the murder led Syria, blamed by many in Lebanon and the West for the killing, to withdraw from Lebanon after three decades of political custodianship.
Members of Lebanon's majority March 14 coalition - formed a month after the assassination - have held a memorial rally on February 14 each year since Hariri's death. Lebanon's An-Nahar daily said Wednesday that Hariri's son and parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri, Lebanese Forces head Samir Geagea, Phalange chief Amin Gemayel, and Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt will all speak at the event, which is to take place between 10:30 am and 12:50 pm - the moment that Hariri was killed four years ago.
Security for the rally is a concern, particularly as partisanship is running high just months before parliamentary elections scheduled for June.
Recently, local media have reported that some March 14-aligned reporters have received threatening telephone calls warning them not to attend the rally. In addition, two MPs in the Future Movement, the party started by Rafik Hariri and now led by his son, have reportedly been warned that the Islamist militant group Fatah al-Islam is planning to assassinate them.
Future MP and former Minister Ahmed Fatfat told The Daily Star that all security preparations for the event were important, and called the Defense Ministry's temporary ban "a very good decision.""Sure we are concerned [about security]," he said, "but we are very confident in the army and its capability."
Fatfat predicted that the rally would be "a big success," citing widespread popular support and a heavy mobilization campaign across the country.
"It has a lot of meaning," he said of Saturday's gathering. "Of course, for Rafik Hariri and all the others who died for their country, but also a very big message that we refuse to be a slave to happened in 7 May 2008 [when Hizbullah and its allies briefly drove rival gunmen from most of Beirut] and that we continue to the battle for independence and democracy and our support for the international tribunal [to try suspects in Hariri's murder]."

Abdullah: The Relentless King
By ABBAS ALI
February 12, 2009 (AFP via Newscom)
For decades, fearing the undesirable reaction of their people, Arab heads of states have either failed to express succinctly their political message or merely heeded the popular sentiments of the Arab street. Their stance on the Middle East and world affairs, therefore, has been ambivalent and at best has resembled the Orwellian "doublethink:" one declared message is tailored for the satisfaction of the public and one is communicated through private or diplomatic channels to Western leaders. The outcome has been a paralyzed political process and a perpetuation of a vicious cycle of violence.
During the Israeli-Lebanon crisis in 2006, a dramatic change took place from which there emerged a cohesive and articulated message which was pivotal in inducing some Arab heads of states to take a stance, irrespective of the popular sentiment in their countries. Within a few days, the message became instrumental in turning around a large segment of the Arab street, which ultimately distanced themselves from Hezbollah and its powerful nationalistic message. Israel, for the first time since its inception, has garnered sympathy from some quarters in the Arab world in its fight against Hezbollah.
This event was a milestone development in the march for accepting Israel and was the result of a concentrated and probably the most tangible strategic changes that have ever taken place in the region. A few decades ago, the prospect of such a dramatic change could only be relegated to the ranks of fiction. The architect of this new strategy is no other than King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.
In order to discredit Hezbollah and its patrons, Syria and Iran, the king employed his personal influence among the Arab heads of states and effectively utilized the kingdom's powerful media networks. Most importantly, influential members of the Wahhabi religious authority issued a fatwa prohibiting any help to Hezbollah. Within a few days, the official sentiments and the message in most media outlets in the region were profoundly changed. Hezbollah was depicted in a persistent, disciplined, and clearly articulated message across the Arab and the Muslim Worlds as a sectarian organization interested in its own glory and the weakening of Arab countries.
The recent events in Gaza were a critical test of whether or not the changes in the Arab political landscape which took place in 2006 had established roots. Given the fact that Hamas is not Hezbollah and has massive and powerful support among followers and sympathizers of the Muslim Brotherhood and other religious and political organizations across the Muslim and Arab world, the expectation was that King Abdullah would face an unwinnable challenge. But the king was not about to squander his political capital; nor was he willing to let events be dictated, by what he perceived were radical groups like Hamas, dwarf his achievements and stature in the Middle East politics.
As the pressure in the Arab Street mounted, and Qatar and other Arab governments called for an emergency meeting for the heads of the Arab states, the monarch was unshakable and asserted that any meeting, during this time, would enlarge the division among Arabs, lead to polarization of the Arab camp, and that the appropriate step to be taken was for Palestinians to unite first behind Mahmoud Abbas' authority. Egypt and Jordan reacted favorably and some other Arab states, propagated the same message that the Palestinian house must be rearranged before a meaningful solution to the crisis could be reached. This gave Israel needed time to maneuver and advance its "Cast Lead" military operation.
King Abdullah's foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal, announced on Jan. 1, that only if the U.N. Security Council "fail[s] to bring about a cessation of hostilities, [will] an Arab summit will be convened in the Qatar capital, Doha."
At the same time, the king persuaded the religious authority to issue a fatwa. The fatwa called for Palestinians "to be conscious of God and to depend on Him, and to avoid division ... and to consult those who have knowledge, reason, and wisdom in all of their affairs" before they undertook any action.
The fatwa, while calling on Muslims to offer moral support along with medicine and money to Gazans, squarely placed the blame on what was happening in Gaza on the division among Palestinians; implicitly blamed Hamas.
Abdullah reiterated his call on Jan. 4 for the Palestinians to be united, stating, "I support every effort that is aimed at strengthening ... the unity of Palestinians and their leadership." And as Qatar and its supporters continued their call for an Arab summit in Doha, he invited the foreign ministers of the Arab Gulf States to convene in Saud Arabia. Again, the king vehemently rejected the call for an Arab summit in Qatar and instead recommended that the Arab heads of states consult on Gaza issues as a sideline of the already scheduled Arab Economic, Development and Social summit which was to take place in Kuwait. This diplomatic initiative was instrumental in the failure of the Doha summit and the weakening of Hamas supporters.
As Israel announced a ceasefire and started to withdraw its military from Gaza, Abdullah shifted his message during the Arab economic summit in Kuwait, by placing a priority on building Gaza and offering financial support. He presented the image of a leader who is above division, warned Israel of its wrongdoing, and underscored the wisdom of those who supported his views, stating: "We value all those who strove to put an end to the bleeding, especially our brothers in Egypt under the leadership of President Hosni Mubarak." In particular, he reminded Palestinians that their discord rather than Israel is their enemy.
While serving as crown prince and regent to his ailing brother, King Fahd in 1990s, Abdullah had reached two conclusions. First, Saudi Arabia's national interests coincide with those of the United States'. Second, Israel is no longer a threat to the status quo in the region. Rather, it is a strategic force for maintaining stability and deterring outside threats, especially from Iran.
The Barack Obama administration presents a fresh challenge to King Abdullah, who might find his freedom in dealing with the new White House severely limited and his familiar approaches unworkable. Successive Republican and Democrat administrations have treated the kingdom and its monarch with special care and made sure that their interests were protected. More importantly, Abdullah has had a close personal friendship with George W. Bush and his father. Both presidents looked on Abdullah as a friend and an indispensable ally.
It remains to be seen how President Obama, the idealist liberal, views King Abdullah, the traditional monarch. The king has not left events to chance. Since the Gaza crisis, he has intensified his efforts to situate himself as the ultimate problem solver in the Middle East and the faithful defender of U.S. interests in the region. He and his government have consistently sent messages concerning peace with Israel, isolating Iran, and weakening Iran's supporters in the Arab world, i.e. Syria, Hezbollah, Hamas, and other nationalistic organizations. On Feb. 3, Abdullah's government issued an implicit call for Arabs to be aware of Iran's policies disguised as defending Arab and Muslim interests. The government, too, in cooperation with Egypt, organized a conference on Feb. 3 for foreign ministers of U.S.-allied states to back the peace initiative with Israel.
Motivated by ensuring the survival of and maintaining security in the kingdom, Abdullah is counting on Washington's traditional support. This may explain why he appears to be in a race with time to demonstrate to President Obama that his kingdom is a trusted ally which is willing to utilize its unlimited wealth and resources to steer events in the region into a direction that serves Israel's concerns for security, while optimizing what he perceives as American interests in the region.
Abdullah understands that Obama seeks to differentiate his administration's foreign policy from that of his predecessor, and that Obama might not agree or see eye to eye with him. Nevertheless, Abdullah knows that, at this moment, he holds the key to two important factors: the free flow of oil and peace with Israel. He is betting that Obama ultimately reciprocates his friendly gestures.
**Abbas J. Ali is the author of "Business and Management in Saudi Arabia: Challenges and opportunities for Multinational Corporations," which was published by Routldge, December 2008. He is a professor and director, school of International Management Indiana.

Part II: How serious is the EU about supporting democracy and human rights in Lebanon?
Friday, February 13, 2009
Daily Star
The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) Working Papers
Editor's Note: This is the second and concluding part of a working paper by scholar Julia Choucair Vizoso from the FRIDE think tank based in Madrid and published by ECFR. The document provides a comprehensive overview of EU-Lebanon ties and comes up with a series of recommendations on the various means by which the EU could support democracy and human rights in Lebanon.
EU multilateral aid to Lebanon
EU multilateral aid to Lebanon has incorporated political reform objectives to a much greater extent than member states' bilateral aid. Certain elements in the approach, however, limit the effectiveness of this aid in promoting democracy. The most significant problem in the EU's approach to political reform in Lebanon is that it avoids dealing with the main blockages to democracy in the country. The framework's objectives, while worthy in and of themselves, do not target the sensitive but core issues of political representation and institutional power in Lebanon. Also, levels of aid destined to political issues continue to be very limited relative to other traditional developmental aid.
The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership
Initiative or Barcelona Process
The Barcelona Process, launched in 1995 to foster cooperation between the European Union's member states and the countries that qualified as "Mediterranean partners," introduced the issue of democracy into EU-Mediterranean relations, for the first time explicitly identifying political pluralism as a norm that should govern relations between Europe and the Arab world. The declared aim of developing a pluralistic democratic society based on respect for human rights and the rule of law would be pursued indirectly through three pillars: a political and security partnership to establish "a common area of peace and stability", an economic and financial partnership aiming to create "an area of shared prosperity" mainly through the establishment of a free trade area, and a social and cultural partnership dedicated to human resources development, better understanding between cultures, and exchange between civil societies.
The EU-Lebanon Association Agreement, which was signed in June 2002 and entered into force on 1 April 2006, focuses on reforms affecting EU-Lebanese trade relations, but also includes a clause stating that "relations between the two parties, as well as the provisions of this Agreement itself, shall be based on democratic principles and fundamental human rights as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights." The agreement establishes continuous "political dialogue" whereby Lebanon is expected to discuss political reforms with the EU. Despite the stated intention to advance political reform, the distribution of MEDA assistance, the main financial instrument of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, has demonstrated that political reform is not a priority.
Between 1995 and 2006, the total amount of funds committed under MEDA I and II was 417 million euros, but a very limited portion went to programmes related to political reform. MEDA focused instead on the rehabilitation of Lebanese administration, an investment-planning programme, industrial modernisation, and social and economic development.
Furthermore, in the few cases where programmes were defined as political aid, they focused on administrative and technical issues, not on democratisation. For example, the MEDA programme provided 1,500,000 euros for the reform of the Lebanese judiciary system, but this entailed providing conference halls for training judges, exchange study courses for judges in Europe, providing technical support to the Ministry of Justice for the preparation of a master plan for computerising all Lebanese court work, and purchasing works and magazines pertinent to the European legal system.
MEDA also launched a 1,000,000 euro programme for strengthening Lebanese civil society, known as AFKAR, with the objectives of promoting of citizenship and rule of law, fostering inter-communal dialogue, and supporting marginalised groups.
The 16 projects funded had very worthy objectives, but only very few address issues that can be considered relevant to democratisation in Lebanon.
Another problematic element of the EU's financial support under MEDA was that the method of fund allocation reinforced the problems of political representation in Lebanon. For one thing, state representatives on MEDA's grant-awarding committee in Lebanon, attached to the Office for the Minister of State for Administrative Reform (OMSAR), are appointed according to sectarian affiliation. Also, OMSAR selected the Lebanese NGOs that would receive funds from the EU.
The priorities established in the National Indicative Programmes (NIP) 2002-2004 and 2005-2006 (which awarded 80 and 50 million euros respectively) also excluded political reform, and focused instead on support for the implementation of the Association Agreement, social and rural integrated development, support for environmental protection, cooperation in higher education, support for knowledge economy, and strengthening the competitiveness of the private sector.
Although the 2005-2006 NIP mentions human rights and democratisation as a priority for EU policy in Lebanon, it does not allocate any funds for this goal. The priority defined as "supporting the implementation of the Association Agreement" includes sections on the "rule of law" and "support for human rights, civil society, and democracy" but these are comprised of short vaguely worded paragraphs that pledge support for "better protection of fundamental rights and civil liberties" without providing any details of what this entails.
The European Neighbourhood Policy The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), developed in 2004, places a more explicit emphasis on democracy and human rights compared with its predecessor Euro- Mediterranean Partnership Agreement. In line with its aims to differentiate more between southern Mediterranean states, the ENP introduced a more targeted approach to political reform in Lebanon. The financial support for the European Neighbourhood Policy has been provided for through a European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), which replaced the former programmes of EU funding in Lebanon (such as MEDA).
The central element of the ENP is the bilateral Action Plan, which lays out the strategic objectives of cooperation between Lebanon and the EU. The Action Plan, adopted on 19 January 2007, includes the following priorities related to democratisation and human rights: support ongoing efforts to improve good governance and transparency in line with relevant UN conventions; implement plans for decentralisation and local government reform; strengthen measures against corruption through the effective implementation of a national anti-corruption strategy; reform of the electoral law; continue to develop an independent and impartial judiciary; establish a comprehensive human rights strategy, including protection of rights of minorities, marginalised populations and non-citizens; support freedom of media and freedom of expression; support freedom of assembly and association; development of civil society; and promotion and protection of the rights of women and children.
The 2007-2010 NIP is the first document of its kind to allocate funds to political reform in Lebanon. Of the 22 million euros it allocates for this purpose (11.76% of the total allocation of 187 million euros), 10 million euros are destined to judicial and prison reform and 12 million euros to political reform. The judicial component involves the improvement of transparency and the effectiveness of the judiciary, the improvement of prison detention conditions, and cooperation with the Lebanese government on security related issues. The political reform component includes multiple objectives: reforming the electoral law and electoral framework; supporting the preparation and implementation of the National Action Plan on respect for human rights; reforming the administrative framework to promote freedom of expression, association and assembly and independence of the media; supporting women's participation in political, economic and social life; promoting a child welfare strategy; strengthening measures against corruption through national anti-corruption strategy; and strengthening the capacity of civil society organisations to implement reforms and support initiatives that promote national identity and social inclusion.
The ENP has attempted to incorporate more monitoring mechanisms and benchmarks for its objectives. Firstly, progress reports evaluate the implementation of the Action Plan and, more precisely, the NIP. The first progress report for Lebanon (published on 3 April 2008) states that the political context has not yet allowed Action Plan objectives to be meaningfully addressed. Secondly, sub-committees have been created to deal with the sectors contained in the Action Plan. A subcommittee on human rights, democracy, and governance has been established in Lebanon, but the progress report only cites two activities by the subcommittee.
In April 2007 the subcommittee agreed to promote a public debate on the basis of the work of Lebanon's National Commission on Electoral Law Reform but no progress was possible in view of the political standoff. The subcommittee also renewed its pledge to implement the legislation that provides for a gradual transfer of prison management from the Ministry of Interior to the Ministry of Justice.
The NIP also integrates the concept of positive political conditionality by including the promise of more aid being granted in response to reform promises, namely through a "governance facility" that will deliver increased financial assistance to better-performing partners.
The NIP also calls for the creation of a Lebanese national action plan on human rights and democracy, as proposed in the 2003 Commission Communication on "Reinvigorating EU actions on Human Rights and Democracy with the Mediterranean Partners." This plan - which is separate from the general Action Plan - would include a list of specific action points (which have not yet been indicated) as well as measurable benchmarks of performance with a clear timeline. The Lebanese parliament stated its intention of developing such a plan by the end of 2006 and of attempting to get it approved by the government in 2007, but these activities have been severely constrained by the political crisis.
The European Initiative on Democracy and Human Rights
In contrast to the ENPI, which only involves government-to-government cooperation, the European Initiative on Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) cooperates directly with Lebanese civil society and is able to fund NGOs without the Lebanese government's consent. Between 2002 and 2006, the EIDHR financial allocation for micro projects totalled 1,325,000 euros, with a maximum of 100,000 euros per project. Micro projects focused on: training youth in human rights issues, protecting the rights of migrant workers and refugees, and promoting children's rights. The EIDHR has also funded macro projects dealing with torture prevention and monitoring (153,150 euros), rehabilitation for torture victims (348,693 euros), and assistance for victims of torture (642,000 euros). The EIDHR also funded (with 1.9 million euros) an electoral observation mission to monitor the parliamentary elections of June 2005. This was the first time international observers monitored a Lebanese election.
Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean (UMed)
The most recent deliberations over EU policy in the Mediterranean reveal the continuing hurdles in the ability and willingness of the EU to promote democracy in its neighbourhood. The initiative of Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President, to launch a "Union of the Mediterranean" reveals that while many European leaders recognise that the Barcelona process has failed to deliver on its promises, a serious and much-needed introspective re-evaluation of the framework is not imminent. In addition, this most recent impulse to revitalise Euro-Mediterranean relations has moved the dialogue even further from the issue of political reform.
Sarkozy's "Union of the Mediterranean" proposal - first mentioned in his election night press conference on 6 May 2007 - seems to be based on his concerns about the marginalisation of the Mediterranean in the world economy, the inadequacies of the EU's Mediterranean policy, and the erosion of France's role as a geopolitical actor in the Mediterranean. Many EU member states feared that the scheme - which excluded non-Mediterranean EU countries - was an attempt to revive French foreign policy at the expense of the framework of the Barcelona Process. This opposition, particularly from Germany, ultimately transformed the original plan into what is currently being presented as an "upgrading" of the Barcelona Process. As a result of the rough evolution of this initiative, the details - particularly how it will fit into the framework of the existing Euro-Mediterranean agreements - remain murky. The European Commission proposed some broad guidelines in May 2008, but the official summit on 13 July 2008 in Paris under the French EU presidency has postponed hammering out the institutional and logistical details until a meeting of the foreign affairs in November 2008. What is clear after the July summit, however, is that the "upgrading" that is being envisioned does not include re-examining the issue of political reform.
The new initiative identifies the shortcomings of the Barcelona process as "the perceived lack of co-ownership by Mediterranean partners, the lack of institutional balance between the weight of the EU on one side and the Mediterranean partners on the other, and the weak visibility and the perception by citizens that little is done to tackle their daily problems and their real needs". In response, the new initiative will try to enhance co-ownership, primarily through the co-presidency of the UMed by an EU member and a partner country. It will also "make multilateral relations more concrete and visible through additional regional and sub-regional projects relevant to the citizens of the region". So far, the projects presented at the inaugural summit are very technical projects focused on energy and energy security, environment, civil protection and transport. The joint declaration at the summit of the Union for the Mediterranean includes only a brief mention of the commitment of governments to strengthen democracy and political pluralism.
Policy recommendations
The challenges to democratisation in Lebanon are colossal. In addition to entrenched domestic interests in the undemocratic system, the obstacles include an unreceptive regional environment characterised by seemingly intractable conflicts. Ultimately, EU policy is not a crucial factor is these dynamics. However, the EU can still serve as positive force for democratisation. In order to fulfill this role, EU policy must address both the structural domestic roots of the Lebanese predicament as well as external factors. This requires a coherent policy that coordinates between the different European tools in Lebanon: diplomatic mediation, political dialogue with Lebanese leaders, and democracy assistance. The following recommendations are intended as guiding principles for EU engagement in Lebanon:
In the absence of a modicum of stability in Lebanon, political reform is a moot point. Thus, despite the limits to its ability to bring about a breakthrough in the regional context (as expounded in this paper), the EU should continue to pursue its conflict reduction role in Lebanon to ensure that the deep divisions that exist among political forces continue to be managed through institutional politics, and do not degenerate into renewed confessional and sectarian anxieties and conflict. In this context, the EU can:
- support a consensual debate in Lebanon that focuses on developing a national defence strategy.
Such a debate would address:
¥ security sector reform,
¥ Hizbullah's weapons,
¥ the international tribunal,
¥ the need for border demarcation with Syria,
¥ the threat posed by Sunni militant forces within Lebanon targeting Lebanese security forces and international peacekeepers.
- continue its dialogue with Hizbullah. In that context, the EU should continue to resist US and Israeli pressure to include the group on its terrorism list.
- pressure Syria - through diplomatic engagement and negotiations on the EU-Syria association agreement - to release Lebanese prisoners in Syrian jails and fully normalise diplomatic relations with Lebanon, building on the recent announcement in Paris that the countries will open embassies in each other's capitals.
- search for diplomatic openings to promote a Syria- Israel and Lebanon-Israel comprehensive peace agreement.
- utilise its involvement in UNIFIL, not only to prevent violent conflict on Lebanon's southern border, but also to aid with the long-needed reconstruction of southern Lebanon.
- continue to provide humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.
While acknowledging that there are no short-term prospects for a secular non-confessional and non-sectarian Lebanon, the EU must push for reforms that address the key flaws in the confessional system. The EU's political reform programmes should target the sensitive but core issues of political representation and institutional power.
-The confessional and sectarian system can only be challenged through the creation of institutions and processes that allow multiple socio-economic interests to cut across sectarian ones. The EU should support and foster movements and activities which are not limited or defined by sectarian interests. While technical assistance to different Lebanese institutions is helpful, it does not target the real causes of the deficiencies in their capacity and accountability.
-Reform of the electoral system is a crucial area where some progress towards the eventual breakdown of the confessional and sectarian pressure on the electoral process could be made. While reform must be primarily a Lebanese process, the EU can assert its support for a reform of the electoral framework on the basis of the proposals by the independent National Electoral Commission formed in August 2005. It can also - at the request of the Lebanese parliament - help in election observer missions.
If the EU is truly committed to political reform in Lebanon, the levels of aid allocated to political reform by the European Commission as well as member states to Lebanon should reflect this commitment.
The EU's involvement in Lebanon should develop more institutionalised and systematic coordination on reform aid.
-Member states should temper disconnects between different internal bodies involved in aid distribution. Some member states have taken steps in this direction, but so far these efforts have addressed security and development issues, not political reform.
- While European embassies in Lebanon coordinate detailed funding issues and share information, this has not been matched by greater coordination in Brussels or national capitals over some of the bigger conceptual issues involved in reform strategies. Not until 2000 did commission officials begin preparing "country papers" incorporating information on member states' bilateral efforts as well as on commission programmes.
Local coordination with member states now takes place in the framework of the annual work plans and is conducted through regular and thematic meetings.
The EU should abandon its misguided tendency to assume that political change will follow naturally from economic reform.